Another postponement leaves ex-Sars trio frustrated
Updated | By Pieter van der Merwe
The matter has been postponed again as the defence attempts to access the full docket.
A lawyer representing three former South African Revenue Service (Sars) officials has criticised the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) for backtracking on a commitment it made in court.
The case against the trio was again postponed while the defence applies to get access to parts B and C of the docket.
In April, the state agreed to make the docket accesible to the defence, but when asked why the defence was only given access to ‘clip A’, attorney for the accused Bernard Hotz said "your guess is as good as mine".
"If you stand up in court and say you are going to provide the defence with the entire docket, the entire docket means the entire docket," Hotz told reporters.
But the NPA insists it will challenge the application, saying access to parts B and C "is not an automatic right".
Citing a recent court judgement in the Christopher Panayiotou case, NPA spokesperson Luvuyo Mfaku explains an "accused person must establish prima facie factual metric showing relevance of those documents".
Sections B and C contain correspondence as well as the investigation diary, said Mfaku.
The charges against Ivan Pillay, Johann van Loggerenberg, and Andries Janse van Rensburg stem from crimes allegedly committed in 2007 and 2008. They maintain their innocence.
Prosecutors accuse Pillay and Janse van Rensburg of commissioning Helgard Lombard to intercept the communications of the NPA and the Directorate of Special Operations (DSO) without the authorisation of a judge in 2007.
Pillay also stands accused of corruption, along with van Loggerenberg, over an alleged R100 000 payment to Lombard a year later.
The ongoing case against the officials comes despite the previous case linked to the unit being withdrawn and the auditing firm implicating them in wrongdoing, KPMG, admitting to shortcomings in its own report into the High Risk Investigation Unit, also referred to as the ‘Rogue Unit’.
Hotz has described parts B and C of the docket as crucial for the defence, insisting his clients are not being treated fairly by the state.
"We will persist with that to ensure that my clients get a fair trial based upon access to all evidence and to be able to prove, ulitimately, that they are innocent of the charges," he concluded.
Mfaku said the NPA will argue that the defence needs to produce evidence as to why it should have access to the papers.
The matter has been postponed to 24 August.
Show's Stories
-
LISTEN: Actress Sophie Joans talks about her award-winning play
Two extraordinary stage talents, Sophie Joans and Rob van Vuuren, have t...
The Drive with Rob & Roz 5 hours ago -
LISTEN: The best road trip tips ahead of the Easter weekend
From traffic to packing, Rob Forbes and Rozanne McKenzie are sharing tip...
The Drive with Rob & Roz 8 hours ago